Friday, May 25, 2012

This week's addition to the Legions Waging War is a United States Senator from Washington State. Yep. Just north of here.

What's shocking, of course, is that she's a woman herself. Let it be said, the Republican War On Women does not discriminate. Welcome, Senator Patty Murray, to the fighting frontlines of our war. (You can get the war room tactics and a pic here.)

Thursday, May 24, 2012

All well and good to think of Democrats as somehow thinking about "the little guy."

After three and a half years of an Obama Presidency, the casual observer would note how much the friends of Obama have profitted.

Unions, environmentalists, crony capitalists, not just billions, but trillions of dollars have been given and committed to Obama's pals. There are estimates, just coming out, that the unfunded commitments of our nation's governments--national, state and local--are approaching 45-trillion dollars.
This is a big number. End of the road kind of number.

Still, it seems that much of the public debate as we enter another Presidential election season is centered around whether or not the policies of our governments are fair. Fairness is the central point of argument. Is this fair? Is that fair?
If anyone is harmed, potentially harmed, theoretically harmed, then what ever it is that is causing this real, potential or theoretical harm is bad. And anyone who wants to stop the wasteful spending that is spent avoiding these harms, potential or theoretical harms, is evil. A is harmful. We should spend money avoiding A. B may be potentially harmful. We should spend money avoiding B. C is theoretically harmful. We should spend money avoiding C.

Kids, life is harmful.

The killing machine that is life is the problem, so, why don't we spend more money ending life? I know that Planned Parenthood is doing its part, but what are you and I doing on a daily basis to end life?

In California, I'm told, they had a hearing on black carbon today. A gas. Maybe if you do a search of black carbon gas California, you'll get a hit. I've never, until I heard this, ever thought of carbon as a gas. In California, they do things differently. Why is this important? Because this black carbon gas is harmful.

According to the guys in California fighting for air quality. Because, air quality can save lives. And lives are important. And whether the lives saved are real, potential or theoretical is unimportant, since the penumbra of safety overshadows all other concerns.
The penumbra and emanations that are discovered in the political viewpoints of those who would continue spending in the face of a financial cliff are at least interesting. An example is the frenzy to spend money for Green Techology.

I'm not going to review stupid things like Solyndra, you know they're stupid. Governments taking the role of venture capitalist is stupid. Governments don't innovate. They smother.

"Since 2008, taxpayers have spent or provided loan guarantees of $6.5 billion for electric vehicles. That includes $2.4 billion for battery and electric drive component manufacturing, $3.1 billion in loan guarantees for electric vehicle projects, and $1 billion in tax credits for the vehicles. The price that American taxpayers pay for commercializing electric vehicles is painfully evident in the billions spent on green projects that are driven by politics rather than performance.

"Using taxpayer dollars to favor one automotive technology over another is contrary to the free-market principles that undergird our economy. Simply put, subsidizing electric vehicles doesn't make economic sense.

"The surest way to guarantee a product's failure is to subsidize it. Over time, cars that succeeded in the marketplace have been those that were developed and commercialized without government involvement. If a technology isn't capable of succeeding on its own economic merits, there's no amount of taxpayer support that will ever make it a commercial success."

But, if we don't have governments spending money to create these new technologies, we're going to be condemned to continue relying upon old technologies! Why?

Why do we need massive subsidies for light-rail? Why do we need massive subsidies for electric cars? Why do we need massive subsidies for wind power? Why do we need massive subsidies for solar power? Why?

No matter how excercised you can get over real harm, potential harm or theoretical harm, the answer is, all this "new" technology is simply shite. It isn't worth the money used to produce it. Recently, Kathleen Hartnett White published a paper on air pollution. You've probably never heard of it, let alone read it. You can read it here. (.pdf)

What Ms. White has discovered is, that the EPA isn't really about the science, but about the harm, potential harm or theoretical harm that pollution can cause. What Ms White has discovered is, that the EPA is now using its "this might be an unprovable harm" to suggest the need for regulation. And we are all supposed to nod our heads, since the role of government is to protect us from harm, suggested harm, potential harm, ephemeral harm, improbable harm, theoretical harm, and lousy theory harm. This is a penumbra, indeed.

Thankfully, we have Really Smart Guys to take us by the hand. Even though at the same time, we're all Thelma and Louise financially.

Democrats. Gotta love 'em. All they want is to spend the money! We Jaspers wouldn't do it if left to our own devices! Democrats!

Wednesday, May 16, 2012

Do you have any clue how insecure you must be, if you keep repeating "look at what I did!"

This guy, this President, has gone into the archives of former presidents on the White House website, and added comments about himself. From what I can see, it starts with our 30th President, Calvin Coolidge, and continues from there.

"In a 1946 letter to the National Urban League, President Truman wrote
that the government has "an obligation to see that the civil rights of
every citizen are fully and equally protected.” He ended racial
segregation in civil service and the armed forces in 1948. Today the
Obama Administration continues to strive toward upholding the civil
rights of its citizens, repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, allowing people of all sexual orientations to serve openly in our armed forces."

There's just too much Obama to put on one page, so, they wisely spread him around.

Monday, May 7, 2012

Readers of either literature, or of non-fiction, might have some familiarity with Joseph Campbell. I don't think it's possible that anyone who has left college in the last twenty years with a sociology degree left without an awareness of Carl Jung. Not that any of the members of the classes stated above had actually read either Campbell or Jung, but that they had had at a minimum a survey course that gave Campbell and Jung credit for some influence on a certain type of intellectual inquiry. From psychology to aesthetics, the basis for what passes as intellectual inquiry into the nature of Man is typically reduced, under the current liberal orthodoxy, as being dependent upon either Jungian interpretation, or the interpretation of Jung from Campbell. Jung was a successor to Freud, who broke with Freud over the definitions that Freud introduced (the Id, the Ego, and the Superego.) Jung still took the basic analysis of Freud, interpretation of dreams and hypnosis and determined that the Freudian division was an improper rationalisation of the mental process; that thought and meaning couldn't be divided into parts. The Jungian interpretation averred that the analysis that was necessary treated the thoughts, emotions and behaviours of the the patient required an interpretation that considered the whole of all those individuations.

For those unwilling to dig out their college texts, my synopsis is this brief; Freud believed that there was conflict between the partitions of the human psyche that exhibited itself as aberrant behaviour when those partitions were out of balance; Jung believed that the failure to apprehend the patterns of the human psyche left one out of touch with ones understanding of his condition. Freud's view was more in line with the Hegelian line of analysis, in my view, Jung also relied upon Hegel for his justification of viewing the human mind as relying upon a gestalt that exceeded the perceived elements of thought and rationality, and extended to an understanding that exceeded the sum of the conclusion's parts. The theory of how the mind works is still struggling under the conditions set out by both Freud and Jung. Modern psychiatry is attempting to take thought out of the equation of "what is mind," looking at the mind as a set of chemical reactions, that if wholly understood, can allow us to "fix" the human mind into having the appropriate thoughts necessary to have a healthy human mind. At present, from what I have seen, most of this deals with the amygdala, and the uptake of serotonin. That is, the pleasure center, and the feelings one receives from the intake of certain naturally produced, or externally induced, chemicals. (If I have erred in any significant way, please feel free to criticize. This is a blog post, not an essay for the AJM.)

There are, then, two basic schools of thought when it comes to evaluating human thought, and describing the motivations of human thought and behaviour in the popular media. The Freudian is viewed both as antiquated and out of touch with the new realities of Jungian analysis, and more rational and structured than is necessary for the understanding of the human condition. Jungian analysis is favoured, since the interpretation of anything in the Jungian world is directly related only to those discovered or stated archetypes defined within the literature itself. If you exhibit behaviours not explained by any of the previously discovered archetypes, it is simply a lack of understanding or observation that leaves us yearning for greater understanding. The undiscovered archetype.

Unfortunately, most analysis of behaviour is judged against these two schools of interpretation.

Think about that sentence for a moment. Behaviour is being judged by whether or not it fits either the Freudian school of analysis, or the Jungian school of analysis. Behaviour. What you or I choose to do. When faced with catastrophe, how I respond will be judged according to how my behaviour fits with the analysis provided by either Freudian or Jungian analysis.

Let's take a look at some behaviours, and ask ourselves whether or not the analytic of either of these schools of thought are up to the job of determining whether the behaviours being observed are appropriate, or not?

Let's take the case of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious. If anyone amongst us had a greater stake in understanding the human condition, one could aver that the LCWR is invested most in a greater and clearer understanding of the need to determine the appropriate beliefs that should be held in order to adhere to a path of understanding and behaviour, in order to both confirm acceptance of the beliefs of the LCWR, and to view that acceptance of belief as being the motivation behind adhering to a path that fleshes out those beliefs in a way that orders the actions, words and deeds of the member of the LCWR.

The problem is, that it isn't clear that either Freud or Jung can lead one into an understanding of the appropriate beliefs and values of the LCWR.

Stepping aside from the question being begged, let's look at the Green revolution, and the latest news on the war on non-Green. The latest standards for LEED are being proposed. Sometime, later this year, the 2012 LEED standards are going to be proposed to the U.S. Green Building Council.

"The proposed changes to the Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design (LEED) program, administered by the private USGBC group but since
adopted by the federal government, disallows the use of over 75 percent
of America’s certified forests and the third most commonly produced
plastic worldwide." (PJ Tattler, April 19, 2012.)

The problem is, that it isn't clear that either Freud or Jung can lead one into an understanding of the appropriate beliefs and values of the LCWR, but clearly can when it comes to understanding the proposals of the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design program. There are no economic advantages to adhering to the program laid out by LEED. There are no rational standards that can explain why anyone would voluntarily employ the building standards of LEEDS, and no banker would, or should, view the extra expense of building a LEEDS compliant structure more favourable than any other structure, when taking into account the life-span of the building, the construction and maintenance costs, and the amortization of any note associated with construction of said structure. Return on investment isn't determined by any other logic other than the cost of an asset, and the monies that can return to the investor in terms of that cost. There isn't any Ego, Id or Superego involved.

For an investor, there is only one reality; will the investment yield a return greater than the investment's cost, or not?

Freudian or Jungian analysis is also irrelevant to the question of the LCWR. If you're not aware of the issues currently under debate, here's the short version; there are Sisters (Bride of Christ) who have organized themselves into an association (LCWR) that advocate for teachings outside the Church. Advocate for teaching is a nice way of saying committing apostasy. But, apostasy is such a harsh word.

The problem for these wonderful Sisters is, they have forgotten that either Freudian or Jungian interpretation is trumped by another interpretation; Christian interpretation. And for the Catholic Church, that interpretation has been the sole province of the Pope.

The question being posed for the Sisters of the LCWR is whether to continue to adhere to the teachings of faith, or the renunciation of their faith. Asserting that the strong presence of the masculine--the Pope--over the feminine is a question that is needing to be asked. Or, is being asked, if only in the circles of the LCWR. It is not going to be popularly addressed, since most women belonging to the LCWR are bright, educated, intelligent women, subject to the depredations of popular moral theologies. Freud and Jung. Social justice, as promulgated on the Left, from Marx, to Lenin, to Che, to Obama.

The bottom line is, should men and women, such as the women of LCWR, rely upon the analysis of Freud and Jung? Either or? Or, should they take a step back, and ask themselves if there isn't another analysis of the human condition that precedes either Freud or Jung?

Is it possible that in our rush to be accepted by such popular thinkers as Oprah and Bill Maher, the Sisters are forgetting that there is another acceptable analysis of human behaviour?

The push to remove the masculine from intellectuality is nearly complete. More and more boys are removing themselves from the education system since those schools to little if nothing towards their understanding themselves according to the current political and social orthodoxy. Religion is little mentioned, and abused as being a tool of the patriarchy.

This is the Republican War on Women writ large. It has nothing to do with political equality, but much to do with how we perceive our rights, duties and responsibilities as humans; male, female, as fathers and mothers. Politically, I can agree that all humans have a right to have their views expressed, through actions, words and through elections.

But can we simply ignore the need for a strong male, and differences between a Frey and a Freya?

"People keep forgetting that most government spending is transfer payments, but it is only purchases of labor and goods that go directly into the GDP calculations, and it is these accounts that will get smacked by the sequester of discretionary defense and non-defense budgets." (David Stockman, The Aureport.com)

"Just take one example. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics
monthly report, there are 650,000 or so jobs in the U.S. Postal Service
alone. That is 650,000 people who pretend to work at jobs that have more
or less been made obsolete and redundant by the Internet and who are
paid through borrowings from Uncle Sam because the post office is broke.
Yet, the courageous ladies and gentlemen on Capitol Hill cannot even
bring themselves to vote to discontinue Saturday mail delivery; they
voted to study it! That is a measure of the loss of capacity to
rationally cognate about our fiscal circumstance."

Thursday, May 3, 2012

When the Commerce Clause was written, this is the type of thing our Founding Fathers worried about. A single state, or states, that would work together to halt, tax, impede, limit the economic activities of another state.

This is an important distinction from Wickard. Wickard held that a farmer, whose sole purpose was to feed his own livestock, was in violation of a farm bill that regulated the output of farmers who engaged in interstate commerce. If you haven't read Wickard, you should. It is the Plessy v. Ferguson of progressive court judgements. Coming up with "separate but equal" is one of those phrases that should be on a list of terrible Court judgements, including the phrase "emanations and penumbras." If the Plessy court had held that equal was equal, back in 1896 (done from memory, if I'm wrong, fuggadaboudit) most of what has had transpired in the intervening years to Brown wouldn't have been necessary.

When Judge Bork was denied his tenure on the Court, the battle over who or who wasn't admissible to the Court finally gained the attention of the People. The Court, as the Third Branch simply had been ignored in most of what passes for political debate in this country. The Court wasn't political. Until the time of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, we had an almost Grecian faith in our Courts. There is a reason why we built so many monuments in the Classic Grecian style. Reason before emotion. Strict examination of the pure meaning of what words mean. No ambiguity. No equivocation.

So, here's the video. This video should remind the more intelligent of the Left that there is value in accepting rules of governance. The problem with radical agendas is, the last man on the top of the pile gets to determine the rules of governance. Not really what the last man killed had hoped for, but Revolutions have a way of making monkeys out of men.

There is a way of explaining how all these people are wrong, but it requires real world experience in things like trains and coal.

Most of us have never held a chunk of coal in our hands. (I have.) Most of us can't do math. (I can.)

A mile long train, traveling at 30 miles per hour, will take how long to pass by a fixed point? Do you need any help? It is true, that under certain circumstances, minutes will make the difference in saving someone's life. Inarguable. If that is the greater value, why not build an overpass for the train crossing?

Because, it's silly.

Silly arguments aren't argued. Which is why there's not argument against what you viewed in the video above. The arguments above are so silly, so vapid, so merit less, that to respond to the arguments is to give credence that which isn't warranted.

Any child should be able to find the continual errors in argumentation. That the ideas expressed are strongly expressed is true. The speakers really believe the words coming out of their mouths are important.

Wednesday, May 2, 2012

Earlier this week, I found out that one of my accounts, for 25 years, has decided to bolt the doors.

Landlords, attempting to squeeze the last ounce of blood from a treacherous economy, are driving entrepreneurs out of business. (Those bastards!) The good news is, those bastards will be replaced by the next generation of landlords, who, hopefully, follow a more conservative model of investment. I had a chance to sell my place a few years back, for almost four times what I paid. I declined, thinking, what type of place could I afford to buy under these inflated prices?

As it turns out, I was brilliant. Of course, I could have taken the profits without capital gains, put in a small down, and attempted to walk away when the market bubble burst. But you and I know that in the subsequent lawsuit, I'd have lost everything, anyway. (Unless I had buried the money somewhere. Which I probably would have done. And then, faced federal prosecution. I don't want to live in a federal pen. That's just me.)

Markets are serious things. They are invisible, and while quantifiable, rarely quantified. I believe that we tend to overvalue every thing in our lives, from ourselves to our children, to our cars and toys, to our involvement in the community. And this is not an anti-capitalist diatribe. Far from it. I believe that the values we, or others, place upon our possessions are more important to those who attempt to repudiate capitalism. What value of repudiation can occur in a blissful, utopian state? So, those who do the most to stir up derision amongst us are those who most strongly repudiate possession of things. And are most adamant towards their ownership of things. My next-door neighbor has a boat. I don't. I don't care.

Capitalist.

My next-door neighbor has a boat. That's unfair.

Socialist.

My friend, over almost thirty years, is losing her business. The Republican War on Women.

We scored one here, Skippy!

I've spent a lot of time in her shop, talking in groups to her employees, and working with her on her business plan. When you have a conservative business plan, things should work out. When she learned that her major supplier was building a store in her market, it broke her heart and spirit. Repping a national manufacturer for 25 years, and then finding that they were willing to put her out of business happens. Their business model trumped hers. I'm out trying to find companies to take over for her other profit centers. The national product wasn't all that she provided, in terms of goods and services, locally. This market will be under served as a result of her throwing in the towel. But her central retail market was based upon a product provided to her through her "authorized distributor" agreement with a national company. Living in a small market, one simply wouldn't look to ones distribution agreement to protect one from the master supplier.

Live and learn. If you have a master supplier, get a non-compete.

Lessons learned.

Now, for a brief recap of all the stupid going on.

Sen. Jeff Merkley is touting his pork barreling for "health care."

I'll put his press release at the bottom of this post, since it is space consuming, and why make you read his drivel. If you choose to read it, fine. Otherwise, the Senator is attempting to tell "us" that we're better off from his distribution of federal funds, due to his efforts. You and I know that federal funds is simply a way of saying money taken from working folks in order to pay for stuff that no reasonable person would pay for.

Here's an item: "Oregon Public Health gets creative to improve health through breastfeeding support."
Thank God. Imagine the paleontologists in the next millennium looking back at us. These simple mammals who couldn't figure out how they were mammals. Without support from their government.

Man, are we stupid. Again, the whole thing, at the bottom.

Pictures!

We got pictures!

This accident closed the highway between Washington and Oregon, this morning. I believe that if you click on the pics, you'll get a larger picture. All I'm saying is, imagine the rate of speed of these two vehicles, to collide, and then end up so far from each other. A young man died in this crash.

And finally, here's a presser from the local roller derby girls.

Have a great day. And, how's that hope and change thing workin' out for you?

Roller derby has come to the North Oregon Coast! The
Shanghaied Roller Dolls is a flat track women’s roller derby league that
was founded in September of 2011 in Clatsop County. The league is a
non-profit organization with the State of Oregon, has recently gained
membership with the United States Roller Sports Association (USARS) and
is currently working towards membership into the Women’s Flat Track
Derby Association (WFTDA), the governing body for women’s flat track
roller derby.

The Shanghaied Roller Dolls have been practicing hard and plan
on their first public scrimmage later this summer and a bout later this
year. To prepare for the costs, they will be hosting a fundraising
movie event on May 12, 2012 at 9:00 p.m. at the Columbian Theater. The
Dolls will be showing the 1970's rollerskating classic, "Roller Boogie",
followed by live music and raffle prizes! Only $5 gets you in for both
movie and music! Dress in your best 70's outfit and join the
Shanghaied Roller Dolls for this super fun, disco event!

For more information contact the Shanghaied Roller Dolls at SRDLeague@gmail.com or "like" us on Facebook at Shanghaied Roller Dolls Fans.

Grants will help more Oregonians receive affordable, accessible health care

Washington, DC- Today, Oregon’s Senators Jeff Merkley and Ron Wyden announced that the Department of Health and Human Serviceshas
awarded nearly $10 million to ten health centers across Oregon to
expand access to quality health care. Funding for these awards come from
the health reform law passed in 2010 and will ensure residents have
access to essential medical services while creating
jobs.

“Access to timely,
affordable preventive and routine medical care is key to keeping our
families healthy and getting our health care costs under control,”
Merkley said. “These investments in health care centers
in Oregon will get more people in front of health care providers to
ensure they are not facing major, costly problems in the future.
Affordable, accessible health care should be a right for all
Oregonians. Giving our health care centers the tools they need
to serve more Oregon families is a step in the right direction.”

“For
many Oregonians, especially in rural areas, community health centers
are an important life line for access to quality healthcare,” Wyden
said.
“These grants are an investment in not just community health centers
but the overall health of our communities. Increasing access to
affordable, quality healthcare is one of the most important things that
we can do for our residents and I am happy to see these
grant awards are moving us toward that goal.”

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act included $9.5 billion to expand services over five years and $1.5 billion to support major construction
and renovation projects at community health centers nationwide
for 2012 through 2014. The funds announced today are in a series of
awards that will be made available to health centers under the
Affordable
Care Act. The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)
oversees the program. A list of today’s awardees is below:

May 2, 2012Media contact: Public Health Division communications: 971-246-9139, or PHD.Communications@state.or.usOregon Public Health gets creative to improve health through breastfeeding support 25 Oregon counties gear up for breastfeeding promotion projectsOregon Public
Health is exploring creative ways to make Oregon one of the healthiest
states, including reducing heart disease and obesity by promoting
breastfeeding. Oregon’s
Nutrition and Health Screening Program for Women, Infants and Children
(WIC) promotes breastfeeding as a way to achieve optimal health for
babies by reducing the risk of many health problems such as obesity,
diabetes and asthma. Mothers who choose formula over breastfeeding have a
greater risk of high cholesterol, cardiovascular disease and high blood
pressure, which can contribute to heart disease and stroke.
Breastfeeding can also help mothers lose their pregnancy weight gain
more quickly.“Increasing
breastfeeding rates by reducing the many barriers could save more than
$13 billion a year in health care costs nationwide,” said Sue Woodbury,
Oregon Public Health WIC program manager.Most Oregon moms
start out breastfeeding their babies – 90 percent, according to the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). But only 21 percent of
Oregon mothers breastfeed exclusively for the recommended six months.“Grant funds are
giving WIC agencies across Oregon the opportunity to implement unique
ways to eliminate barriers to breastfeeding,” said Woodbury. “Their
efforts range from improving breastfeeding support in worksite and
childcare settings, to creating support groups with lactation
specialists. Each community has different needs.”In 2011, Oregon
WIC won a WIC Breastfeeding Performance Bonus award from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA) for having one of the highest
breastfeeding rates in the nation. That award funds local breastfeeding
support projects. For nearly 40
years, WIC has provided Oregon mothers and children with nutrition
education, breastfeeding support, health assessments, and improved
access to health care and nutritious foods. The program serves about
112,000 people in Oregon every month."For more information about breastfeeding support projects across Oregon, read the complete descriptions here: http://public.health.oregon.gov/HealthyPeopleFamilies/Babies/Breastfeeding/Documents/WICSpecialProjects/ProjectDescriptionsCoordinatorInfo.pdf (pdf) or view the map here: http://public.health.oregon.gov/HealthyPeopleFamilies/Babies/Breastfeeding/Documents/WICSpecialProjects/WICSpecialProjectsMap.pdf(pdf)."